Letters - November 20

Relationship rumblings

Re: “Last Word,” November 6-12

I’m willing to bet that if someone were to submit to Monday Magazine an article that used extremely derogatory language in reference to ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation, it would not even be considered for publication. If, however, it were published, such an article would undoubtedly provoke an immediate reaction and its author no doubt pilloried. And rightly so. Yet, in a recent “Last Word” the writer, in speaking of a short man—and betraying her feelings about short men in general—very derisively referred to him/them as “Lilliputian.”

It was already apparent from references made in the feature article of the same issue that, based on height alone, short men are singled out as unworthy of consideration by many women when it comes to dating. We’re also “overlooked” when it comes time for promotions at work. Studies show, too, that taller men graduating with the same degrees from the same universities are paid more than shorter men, even in cases where the taller men are demonstrably less intelligent.

I would not equate this prejudice to that which first nations peoples, ethnic minorities, or even women, have been subjected to except to say that it ultimately stems from the same bigoted mentality. Tall privilege is every bit as unearned as white privilege, or male privilege. It doesn’t stem from any biological or evolutionary imperative; it’s a social construct every bit as arbitrary and unjustifiable as any prejudice against skin colour, nationality or gender.

I think it’s fair to say that most of us short guys can poke fun at our height and take good-natured jokes in the spirit in which they’re meant. But “Lilliputian?!” To my mind that venomous barb seethed with the same vitriol and contempt one might imagine a hate-filled klansmen using.

The writer of this article probably thought she was being funny in her use of such a demeaning epithet. I’m sure Al Jolson thought he was pretty funny in blackface, too.

Jakob Derksen, Victoria

Re: “Going Solo,” November 6-12

I think I have figured out why the girls in your “Going Solo” article are still single. To be quite honest, I am offended by their attitudes. Katie is quoted as saying she is “looking for a man who expresses himself through manual labour.” As a man I find this statement very oppressive. Why do I have to be reduced to a stereotype of masculinity? This statement is equivalent to saying “I am looking for a woman who expresses herself through household chores.” We all know how that would go over.

These girls also seem to feel a strong sense of entitlement. They are quoted as saying that they aren’t looking for people too short, or people who have “baggage;” they wouldn’t date anyone from the corporate world or with clean thin fingers. If you put up a huge list of limitations on people you don’t even know you are only ever going to meet one type of person. If you only date a guy who already has all of the perceived qualities you are looking for, how could you even know the true depth of personalities and traits there are available to you? The reason these girls haven’t found a man is that they are not looking for a man, they’re looking for a Disneyland fantasy our corporate media culture has created. I would suggest trying to relate to human beings and giving people you wouldn’t normally think to date a chance. Just because you have a conversation or go on a date with someone does not mean you are expected to have sex—be upfront about your intentions from the start.

In terms of “baggage,” everyone has it and I certainly would never hold it against anyone; what is more important is the mechanisms the person uses to deal with problems. Ignoring issues and past experiences is not conducive to a relationship.

Finally, in a city that apparently has a lack of single guys, these girls are still playing their gender roles and waiting for Prince Charming to ask them out—why don’t they ask a guy out?

These girls need to do some serious analysis of their own biases, assumptions and beliefs about relationships before they are ready to have a real relationship. In your own words, “work on your problems first, then ask me out.”

Matt Christie, Victoria

Your article does a serious disservice to singles in Victoria, especially women. There is not one question about the many benefits of singledom, such as independence and freedom. This superficial piece does nothing to validate the many women who choose the single lifestyle. And like it.

The writers remind me of a time when a woman’s worth was based on “getting a man.” Who cares that she won a Nobel Prize—she’s still single!  I am quite sure that the majority of both male and female professionals have more on their mind than whether their occupation helped or hindered them getting a date! (Please wait while I stop laughing.) May I suggest a more progressive article on the joys of being “solo?”  Our society needs to stop this relentless pressure to push people together, when many people are much happier being alone.

Painting my toenails for the perfect guy is not on my busy schedule. And after two marriages to abusive men, I am not eager to walk that plank again. Plus, my wonderful women friends give me more support and caring than any man ever did.

No hot date tonight, Doreen? No, and that is just fine with me, thank you.

Doreen Marion Gee, Victoria

High time for change

Re: Letters, November 6-12

Notions like Daphne Williams’ attack on the current Highlands mayor are laughable in their naïvete. During Williams’ time in the Highlands, one mayor colluded to arrange governments to make the same development he was denying a private person. (That was a clearly stated finding of a court. Unfortunately a higher court nullified the remedy by concluding that the mayor’s nefarious behaviour was legal since the fiefdom had the power under B.C. law.) Weren’t both mayors mentioned herein elected in a free vote by Highland residents?

The solution to Williams’ concern, and mine, is to remove the power of government over the lives of individuals. Then officials and bureaucrats will not be able to play games with the public trust. Will Daphne Williams support that change in laws?

Keith Sketchley, Saanich

You get the point

Re: “The Point,” November 6-12

I don’t know who Mr. Tafler is, but I sure would like to hear more from him. Your city need more people like him who speak the truth. Please pass on my thanks.

Paul Dragon, Victoria

Bravo Sid Tafler for speaking out about the monolithic-structure mania that is sweeping our once-quaint little village. Why indeed are we turning cozy little hobbit holes into Sauruman’s black tower and when do the Dark Riders appear? Supposedly intelligent people all over the city embrace the idea of having us look like Vancouver or North Toronto. Yule Heibel in Focus magazine talks about having View Towers declared a heritage site. Has Ms. Heibel actually been in View Towers? Our city without View Towers would look pretty freakin’ wonderful to these aged eyes. My grandfather was Bishop of B.C. and oversaw the construction of Christ Church Cathedral and I never fail to marvel at those sere towers and magnificent flying buttresses. I suggest City Council are flying, that this mania is akin to the worst of manic highs and that we are going to regret this period of growth when the distinct seven villages in town are no more. One only has to view the gaping hole where the Oak Bay Beach Hotel was to experience an ineffable sense of loss and now I hear that Anne Hathaway’s cottage is slated for demolition. I have lived in cities all my life but the green fields of Saanich look pretty good right now, with Sooke a close second. Sooke and ye shall find Metchosin land.

J. David Burke, Victoria

Can’t you read the signs?

It was really sad to see the vandalism and theft of election signs. I do not like what this says about the people who are doing this and a society that does not seem to think that it matters. Are the perpetrators aware that this is a violation of free speech? That it is a violation of all the democratic principles that people have fought and died for? That this is a legal violation? And that taking signs is, plain and simple, theft?

What a shame, as we should be honouring the struggle for free speech and democracy.

Herman Surkis, Victoria